Is the 7950 or 670 truly faster

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
7,163
819
126
Conclusion - All of the 7000 series owners in this thread must have something wrong with their eyesight to not notice MS. Maybe it's the rose-tinted beer goggles AMD includes with their cards. :awe:

OP - The cards are pretty equal if you're talking about the boost version of the 7950. For the money, you're best bet is the 7950.
 

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
Conclusion - All of the 7000 series owners in this thread must have something wrong with their eyesight to not notice MS. Maybe it's the rose-tinted beer goggles AMD includes with their cards. :awe:

Without a direct comparison they just might be absorbing it. Like CF users who are ok with runt frames.

If you've never had steak, how could you possibly know how much better it was compared to a hotdog?
 

Dravonic

Member
Feb 26, 2013
84
0
0
I'm very sensitive to microstuttering and tearing, to the point I can't play without vsync. The only game I ever noticed stuttering is Far Cry 3, but it's a shitfest for both brands. At least it was, not sure if nvidia fixed it on their side, but even with beta 7 and patch 1.04 I get some stuttering with my 7970. Either way, since it's the only game I've seen it, I blame the game, not the card or the drivers.

But that's with a single GPU.
 

Grooveriding

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2008
9,147
1,329
126
I'm very sensitive to microstuttering and tearing, to the point I can't play without vsync. The only game I ever noticed stuttering is Far Cry 3, but it's a shitfest for both brands. At least it was, not sure if nvidia fixed it on their side, but even with beta 7 and patch 1.04 I get some stuttering with my 7970. Either way, since it's the only game I've seen it, I blame the game, not the card or the drivers.

But that's with a single GPU.

In Far Cry 3 it is a game issue. That game stuttered massively for me on my 680s. Even with vsync on it was not smooth.
 

Xarick

Golden Member
May 17, 2006
1,199
1
76
Okay.. was just curious. Having owned a 5850 and watched the mess that was drivers it blows my mind that people are jumping ship to ATI now. It wasn't that long ago that one side or the other was being accused of cheating in this or that.
Image quality analysis seems to have gone by the wayside and now it is microsuttering analysis.. which BTW is a very real issue, but usually caused by memory management issues or poor game code.
The Nvidia is smoother argument is not new and it appears ATI is finally addressing it.
But I find the fact that Nvidia is allowing a 7950 to run as fast for $60 less and not doing anything about it odd.
 
May 13, 2009
12,333
612
126
Without a direct comparison they just might be absorbing it. Like CF users who are ok with runt frames.

If you've never had steak, how could you possibly know how much better it was compared to a hotdog?

Had plenty of steaks (6870 to now 7950) to know a hotdog (2 different 670's) when I see it.
And it'd be really hard to comment on either one when you're still kicking a legacy card like a 470. ;)
 

wand3r3r

Diamond Member
May 16, 2008
3,180
0
0
Had plenty of steaks (6870 to now 7950) to know a hotdog (2 different 670's) when I see it.
And it'd be really hard to comment on either one when you're still kicking a legacy card like a 470. ;)

lol

So many opinionated comments about the experience from people who have never owned the card.
 

Xarick

Golden Member
May 17, 2006
1,199
1
76
My biggest issue with getting a 7950 is that the same thing was going on with the 5850 where people were talking about monster Overclocks. I got a 5850 and could only squeeze another 50mhz out of it before artifacting.
I wonder what the average OC really is and how many people actually achieve it.
Also.. why wouldn't ati run these cards higher if they all OC so well.
 

aaksheytalwar

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2012
3,389
0
76
because they take up a lot more power than what amd would like to advertise.

with a slight to no volt oc with a 7970, 1125 on the core is sure shot and 1150-1175 is highly likely while 1200+ is common (not always) with high volts.

for a 7950 the avg oc should be about 75-100mhz lower on core and about 100-200mhz lower on memory.

the best 7970s end up doing 1300-1350mhz.
 

ICDP

Senior member
Nov 15, 2012
707
0
0
I edited that. The card comparison. AMD cards don't line up exactly with Nvidia cards. There seems to be belief that the 660ti is not worthy VS the 6950. There is often, but the 7950 can o/c to this xxxghz, the 660ti's usually turbo without any input to near 1100mhz also.

edit: I linked the review for the general performance, also. Like it or not, more sites are picking up on including frame time numbers. The whining over it, is getting old fast.

You said it yourself, the 660Ti turbo boosts to ~1050-1100 MHz out of the box. This has the net effect of making the 660Ti look every bit the equal of a 7950. The problem with this assumption is that due to this "turbo boosting" at so called stock, it means a 660Ti is already near max OC potential. In fact out of the box one GTX 660Ti may be slower than an identical one from the same manufacturer due to the way the turbo boost feature works. An absolute top example overclock for a GTX660Ti would net ~15%. Not a lot of overclocking headroom when we consider even a modest OC to 1075 MHz on a HD 7950 boost edition (stock 925) nets around the same OC percentage. Of course this 1075 MHz OC on a HD 7950 is on the conservative side as many reach 1200-1250 or higher (a 30%-35%+ OC). I have a HD 7950 MSI TF3 running at a decent OC of 1150/1700 and at that speed it actually matches my GTX 680 overclocked to 1228 core and @550 VRAM. It is very unlikely GTX 66Ti OC will reach stock GTX 680 speeds let alone match an overclocked on.

If you aren't into overclocking, then yes the GTX 660Ti roughly the equal of a stock HD 7950. Once you bring OC potential into the mix the GTX 660Ti is not a contender. Even [H] state the 7870 XT (Tahiti LE) is a GTX 660Ti killer, and it's not even as fast as a 7950.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013...n_hd_7870_myst_edition_review/11#.UTJs41di5I0

So far the links to Hardwareinfo reviews show that frametimes can be an issue with both AMD and Nvidia. I know for a fact that my GTX 680 and HD 7950 need to have plenty of custom profiles to eliminate/reduce stutter on occasion. I have no problem accepting stutter as an issue, just don't make it out like it absolutely plagues the 7xx0 range of cards and that the GTX 6x0 cards are immune.
 
Last edited:

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
Had plenty of steaks (6870 to now 7950) to know a hotdog (2 different 670's) when I see it.
And it'd be really hard to comment on either one when you're still kicking a legacy card like a 470. ;)

I don't see why, looking at graphs and high speed videos is more than enough for me to make a judgement call on such things.

Though for what it's worth, some people can't tell the difference between 30 vs 60, or 60 vs 120, I guess it's a blessing or curse depending on how you're looking at it.
 

Greenlepricon

Senior member
Aug 1, 2012
468
0
0
I don't see why, looking at graphs and high speed videos is more than enough for me to make a judgement call on such things.

Though for what it's worth, some people can't tell the difference between 30 vs 60, or 60 vs 120, I guess it's a blessing or curse depending on how you're looking at it.

I don't know if it's that some people can't see it, but to me it doesn't make a difference so long as it's not jerky. That's why I love vsync. When it's constantly swapping from 30 to 60fps, I have a problem, but if everything is fluid it suits me just fine. Everything is individual. If you really need 120fps to enjoy a game, then that's your money. If you notice a difference between an Nvidia product and an AMD product then go for it. Personally I don't notice the stutter, and only see that AMD is faster and cheaper.
 

Xarick

Golden Member
May 17, 2006
1,199
1
76
So.. my question is.. I am paying $70 more for a Galaxy GC 670 (factory OC to 1006 and customer cooler). Am I really just throwing $70 away?
 

Kenmitch

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,505
2,250
136
My biggest issue with getting a 7950 is that the same thing was going on with the 5850 where people were talking about monster Overclocks. I got a 5850 and could only squeeze another 50mhz out of it before artifacting.
I wonder what the average OC really is and how many people actually achieve it.
Also.. why wouldn't ati run these cards higher if they all OC so well.

The 5850 ref design was the one to get. Flashing the modded 5870 bios was what got mine to 1000/1300. Took a full water block to keep it cool tho!

Nobody really bins chips these days for maximum speeds....Otherwise we'd see 4.5GHz stock quads from Intel.

The 7950 looks to be the better price wise. I doubt you'd notice the diff in performance.
 
Last edited:

notty22

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2010
3,375
0
0
I have a HD 7950 MSI TF3 running at a decent OC of 1150/1700 and at that speed it actually matches my GTX 680 overclocked to 1228 core and @550 VRAM. No OC on a GTX 66Ti will reach stock GTX 680 speeds let alone match an overclocked on.

I think there is to much fluff in peoples numbers. Everyone who has a o/c of around 1100 is telling others that 1250-1350 is POSSIBLE. Yeah, maybe the top 5% if that.
Of course this 1100 MHz OC on a HD 7950 is on the conservative side as many reach 1200-1250 or higher
Yours doesn't?
 
Last edited:

ICDP

Senior member
Nov 15, 2012
707
0
0
I think there is to much fluff in peoples numbers. Everyone who has a o/c of around 1100 is telling others that 1250-1350 is POSSIBLE. Yeah, maybe the top 5% if that.
Yours doesn't?

I clearly stated in the post you are directly quoting here that 1200-1250 was achieved bay many, not 1250-1350. If you are going to attempt to refute someone's claims at least have the decency to NOT misquote them.

Lots of 7950s are achieving 1200-1250 core clocks in this table. Even 1150-1200 is a very achievable OC and as I pointed out that is = to a GTX 680 overclocked to ~1230-1250. No GTX 660 Ti on air would achieve that performance level.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1196856/official-amd-radeon-hd-7950-7970-7990-owners-thread

Here is my 1st post in this thread where I already answered your last question. You must have missed it but that's understandable because it wasn't my main point.

I have one running at 1150/1700 with 1.195 volts, it can go higher with more voltage but I compromised between noise and performance.

For reference, my MSI 7950 TF3 goes to 1230/1700 at 1.296 volts but I think the fan at 75% on my TF3 is too loud at this setting.
 
Last edited:

dust

Golden Member
Oct 13, 2008
1,328
2
71
For reference, my MSI 7950 TF3 goes to 1230/1700 at 1.296 volts but I think the fan at 75% on my TF3 is too loud at this setting.

But does it have red screens like my Gigabyte 670?:awe:
 
Jun 24, 2012
112
0
0
The thing that helped me choose between a 670 and a 7950 is considering noise. The 79xx series seems to be overrun with coil whine while it's relatively rare with Geforce 600 series. I also notice that coil whine becomes more and more of a problem for the faster you go (ie., cheaper overclocked cards by Sapphire or XFX tend to have more reports of it, high end expensive primo products like MSI Lightning not so much). So when you have a 7950 series card pushing up to 950 or higher, you get more reports of coil whine with that product.

Some of the highest end versions of the card are better about it than others, but those aren't the cards that make the 7950 or 7970 a performance/value king. They're the extreme high end. Meanwhile, the value 660 Ti's or 670's seem to be as rare to have coil whine as the deluxe.

I can't stand beeps and whines and noises. I want my PC quiet. I can't have cheap component selection by AMD adding noise to my otherwise quiet PC. And just because YOU can't hear it, that doesn't mean it's not there. It means YOU can't hear it. My hearing is sensitive enough that I would...

Read some reviews of AMD cards and invariably on the ones you consider a deal or that are on sale (XFX, Sapphire, reference cards), you'll see reports of people discussing lots of coil whine.

Performance is mostly comparable between the two brands aside from the frame rate latency problems (it's not microstutter, it just looks kinda like it; microstutter is when you're dealing with SLI/CF and that's a whole other kettle of fish) that AMD may correct. It's funny to see people here arguing that it's not a problem when AMD themselves said it was a real problem and one they are trying to correct with a new memory management in their drivers.

If the company who designed the GPU and the drivers for said GPU says there's a problem, ...there's a problem. That said, they say they're going to fix it, so...

When I was buying my 670, the price for my Gigabyte non-reference 670 was $30-50 more (with Borderlands 2) than the 7950 most days and $40-60 less than the 7970 (non-GE) most days. I figured I'd get performance between those two cards from game to game.

I tried to find a single Radeon card that didn't have widespread user reviews of coil whine and the only ones that lacked that were either new cards that hadn't been out very long (so next to no user reviews) or ones that were like the MSI Lightning (no value argument there).

And the 7970 GE specifically was not much more than the 7970, so I considered it, but the card ran hotter and louder even with custom cooling (like the same tri-fan cooler on my Gigabyte 670) than equivalent Geforce products. You can go right now and read about the 7970 GE with the same cooler as my 670 where a user review is saying the card throttles at 70 degrees and others who say it is much louder there than on any other card where that cooler is used.

For me, performance is great up to a certain point. Then silence is golden. If I get a LOT of the performance most of the time, but I don't have coil whine or loud fans trying to keep up with a hotter part, then... I can deal with not having the theory of more performance.

Especially when for most of the time these Radeon cards have been out they've had a problem with frame latency that even AMD admits exists. Again, just because you don't notice it doesn't mean you won't be amazed if/when they fix it. It also doesn't mean that others don't already notice it...

My focus wound falling on ensuring I got a quiet part. It's not that every Radeon 79xx series has coil whine or loud fans. It's just that some really, really do and the Geforce line just seems built a lot better toward keeping things quieter whereas the Radeon based on user reviews is a crapshoot.
 
Last edited:

Face2Face

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2001
4,100
215
106
My TF3 goes 1235/1800. It will go higher, I have had it up to 1250, but temps are too high. That's only at 1.160volts on the core and 1.65volts on the memory.


Posted from Anandtech.com App for Android
 

Elfear

Diamond Member
May 30, 2004
7,163
819
126
My GTX 670 boosts to 1240mhz at stock, does anyone know how that compares to a 7950?

From what ICDP was saying from his experience, a 680@1228Mhz is about equal to a 7950@1150Mhz. So your 670@1240Mhz is probably equal to a 7950@1100Mhz.
 

Zanovar

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2011
3,446
232
106
From what ICDP was saying from his experience, a 680@1228Mhz is about equal to a 7950@1150Mhz. So your 670@1240Mhz is probably equal to a 7950@1100Mhz.

I think you are being a bit generous to the 7950 there.
 

Phynaz

Lifer
Mar 13, 2006
10,140
819
126
I don't see why, looking at graphs and high speed videos is more than enough for me to make a judgement call on such things.

So for other people to make a judgement they have to experience it first hand. But you don't have to, because you can feel it in a graph. :colbert:

Nice double standard.
 
Last edited: